Will Mankind Survive?

Nimos · Sep 11, 2019

adrian009 said:
I agree. In fact Jesus was referencing Deuteronomy 6:5 (Matthew 22:37) in regards the most important law. However, Jesus also clearly identifies Himself as the Promised Jewish Messiah (John 14:6) and His Revelation from God while building on the Hebrew Bible at least allows for the possibilty of a significant departure from Mosaic law as it was understood at that time (Mark 2:27). In reframing the Hebrew Bible as He did, He allowed for a theology that undoubtedly was much more accessible to a non-Jewish audience (Romans 9:30-33). He also provided new insights into the nature of Himself (John 1:1-3, John 3:16, John 10:30) and therefore man's relationship with God. In doing so He became the new focal point for worship of God, negating the need for a physical temple (John 2:12-21, Matthew 24:1-2).

I think one have to be careful to think that Jesus had any desire to get away from the law, rather than teach how it was meant to be understood. God didn't give the Jews the law to punish them as I also wrote to Trailblazer, it was to help them. Jesus seem to know this, but is also aware that it is being misused. You as Trailblazer quote Mark 2:27 as suggesting that Jesus wanted to change the law regarding the Sabbath, so will just quote what I answered to that:

This is obviously up for a lot of debate and not sure people actually agree on it. Because you have examples of both things. One explanation could be, that Jesus is trying to teach the Pharisees a lesson. Remember he is not happy about them. But this is going to be a bit complicated and again im not sure what is correct.

But an example in the NT is this:
23 One Sabbath Jesus was going through the grainfields, and as his disciples walked along, they began to pick some heads of grain.
24 The Pharisees said to him, “Look, why are they doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath?”
25 He answered, “Have you never read what David did when he and his companions were hungry and in need?
26 In the days of Abiathar the high priest, he entered the house of God and ate the consecrated bread, which is lawful only for priests to eat. And he also gave some to his companions.”

27 Then he said to them, “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.
28 So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath.”

So is Jesus breaking the rules? At least the Pharisees think him and his disciples are. However in verse 27, 28 Jesus explain that the sabbath was made for man, not man for the sabbath and also that Jesus is the lord of the Sabbath. To me, again taking into account how Jesus think the Pharisees misuse the law, he may try to make a point that the Sabbath is not there to punish people, but to help them so he give the example of David also doing it to feed his men and them not getting punished for it. So a possible explanation could be that under the Pharisees it have gotten to be a burden, especially for the poor and he want to correct that. If we look at the OT:

Deuteronomy 23
24 If you enter your neighbor’s vineyard, you may eat all the grapes you want, but do not put any in your basket.
25 If you enter your neighbor’s grainfield, you may pick kernels with your hands, but you must not put a sickle to their standing grain.

Leviticus 19
9 “‘When you reap the harvest of your land, do not reap to the very edges of your field or gather the gleanings of your harvest. 10 Do not go over your vineyard a second time or pick up the grapes that have fallen. Leave them for the poor and the foreigner. I am the Lord your God.

So it is allowed for people to gather from fields to feed themselves, so I think it might be reasonable to assume, that maybe people have "forgotten" that according to God people are allowed to do this. But that this under the Pharisees have changed for the worse as they have misused the law. And therefore the poor people are suffering due to this.
However you also have the story in the OT, which I mentioned to you earlier in another post, where God demand a person gathering firewood to be stoned to death because he does it on the Sabbath. Some possible explanations could be that there weren't really an agreement about, what exactly were allowed to be done on a Sabbath or what were considered work and not work. Im personally is not sure what is correct or maybe there is another explanation which im not aware of.

You then refer to Romans, which were written by Paul and take place after the death of Jesus, which is when the roots of Christianity starts to take place and apostles starts to spread the word of Jesus, including to the gentiles as you say. However it is also in this period as far as I know, that a split starts to emerge between the traditional belief and Paul starts to argue that non Jews do not need to follow the law and that it is through the believe and acceptance of Jesus sacrifice that one is saved. Again this is not what Jesus said in the gospels, but in regards to spreading the word, I think Paul have a rough time convincing or getting the gentiles to be circumcised, that he need this law to not apply to them. So a lot of changes is going on here including between the apostles. And Paul gives us a few hints about this as they are not really in complete agreement in regards to how these things are to be understood. Basically you end up with what we have today with Christians believing that it is through Jesus one comes to God and that he were either the son of God or part of the holy trinity, in Judaism they do not believe that and in Islam they see him as a prophet, and the Bahai, that its a bit of everything, if I understood it correct. But eventually all of it is based on the same material, just interpret differently and in some cases new stuff have been added.

adrian009 said:
So how does Bahá’u’lláh's Message enable humanity to address the urgent needs of the environment, the world economy and the risk of global conflict? Does Bahá’u’lláh offer anything that Moses, Jesus or Muhammad didn't?

Not sure if its a real question meant for me to answer, but in case it is, then I do not see him offer anything towards solving these things.

Dawnofhope · Sep 12, 2019

Nimos said:
I would agree with you on that, obviously they needed laws to follow, all societies did, both today and back then. Where we look at this differently I think, is that im an atheist, so in my view all of the law were created by humans. Whereas one that believe in God and claim that he exist are faced with a much more difficult task than I am. Because, again I do not claim that any of the laws were guided by God, I don't claim that he is all good, all knowing or omnipotent, so for the laws to contain, what we in a modern society would call immoral laws and even wrong ones is perfectly explainable.

I understand the difference between how an atheist such as yourself and a theist may view scripture. Some Jews and Christians are atheists. They would see human inspiration rather than God behind the stories of the Hebrew Bible and New Testament as you do. Obviously we can take exactly the same approach with Muhammad and the Quran along with Bahá’u’lláh and the Baha’i Writings. I am of course a theist and believe in the God of Abraham.

Nimos said:
But if a person claim that these laws were given to man by God as the bible say, and that this God is all good, all knowing etc. then one would have to explain why some of the laws are immoral. Why a God with the knowledge and power he posses would either inspire the Jews to follow them or allow the Jews to write them down or share them between them while signing God's name to them and thereby allowing them to be taught throughout history. Think about how many people have suffered at the hands of slavery or in the conversions of people to Christianity or at the hand of Islam. All have been able to find excused in the scriptures that is supported by God. To me, that does not seem like its easily explained, why God would allow such teachings to be shared among humans if they were wrong.

I believe humanity was not able to universally abolish slavery until the nineteenth century. Moses, Jesus and Muhammad did not abolish slavery. Their reason was not due to a lack of morality but astutely gauging the capacity of humanity. We were not at a point of maturity where this was possible. Bahá’u’lláh OTOH clearly abolishes slavery as a matter of law for humanity.

Baha’u’llah Frees the Slaves

If we are fair in our judgment then Bahá’u’lláh through abolishing slavery by word and deed as early as the mid nineteenth century has already spearheaded an enormously positive social change. Consider also when He wrote to Queen Victoria proclaiming Himself the Promised One he praised the British Empire for abolishing slavery.

Baha’u’llah Addresses Queen Victoria

Bahá'í Faith and slavery - Wikipedia

Dawnofhope · Sep 12, 2019

Nimos said:
If we look at the Bahai faith, I don't think you are in a much better position in regards to this, because Baha'u'llah calls for the unity of religions and that these all contain truth about God. Which basically say that what these other religions are talking about must to some degree be true as well. But which part of if is true? The Bahai, just as everyone else have no better ways to make this judgement than they have. And just as the other religions, there are certain stories in the scriptures that you would consider wrong or merely historically and therefore not to be believed is the word of God, right?

The Hebrew Bible, The New Testament and the Quran are all books that have formed the basis for great civilisations. One cannot pick and choose, rather must accept these sacred texts in their entirety. While Muslims may regard the Christian Bible as corrupted, there is good support in the Baha’i Writings for the authenticity and authority of the Sacred Writings of all three faiths. So we have a God who has safeguarded His Revelation for the sake of generations over Millenia. That acknowledgment alone will promote harmony and unity between the Baha’is and other faiths. If we disrespect the sacred writings of these three faiths how can we build unity amongst peoples of contending faiths? It also eliminates the problem of needing to pick and choose.

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works

2 Timothy 3:16-17

The Baha’i Faith does much more though. It outlines the principles for lasting peace and cooperation between nations. Consider the principles of the oneness of humankind, international cooperation and a world council with binding legislature, the equality of men and women and the harmony of science and religion. These are not pious hopes but characteristics of a worldwide community of 5 million.

Nimos said:
But how one decide which of them are so, is not that easy. Because we have none of the original writings and we know that the majority of stories have been changed over time, some on purpose other by mistake, so we have no way to verify this with what were originally taught. Just looking at the Bible as we have it today, it is obvious that Jesus is presented differently even when looking at the gospels. For instance this is from the beginning of Luke, which gives us a clue:

Nimos said:
1 Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, 2 just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. 3 With this in mind, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, I too decided to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4 so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.

Most Christians will not see any contradiction in the Jesus presented through the differing Gospels such as Luke or John, and will not view any inconsistency between the God of the Hebrew Bible and New Testament. If we have irreconcilable differences then the Divine Foundations are eroded and we have a very human institution as with any other.

Nimos said:
So apparently "many" other people have written down the events based on the stories that were told at the time. The author also say that he have "carefully investigated everything" so he can write an "orderly account" of the events. Which could suggest that those people writing down the events were not really sure in which order they happened and that it required a "careful investigation" even for the gospel writers to fit these things together.

An accurate portrayal of the Teachings of Christ was far more important than an orderly historical account. Often its forgotten the Bible presents a theological as opposed to historical narrative.

Nimos said:
So even if the Bahai believe the word of Baha'u'llah and he accept that the Bible and the Quran holds some truth to them, one would still have to account for why certain saying by God is not actually made by him, but by man. The same as you would have to convince the muslims that Muhammad were in fact wrong, when they believe that he were the last prophet. But at the same time, just as those of other faith, one would still have to account for why there are so many immoral things done by God in the scriptures, lots which have nothing to do with the law.

The problem hasn’t been the sacred scripture themselves but interpretation.

Consider the sole verse in the Quran Muslims use to justify Muhammad as the seal of the prophets.

Muhammad is not the father of any of your men but the Messenger of Allah, and the seal of the Prophets: and Allah has knowledge of all things.
Quran 33:40

With the misinterpretation of this single verse the Muslims have imagined the hands of God are tied and the flow of Divine Revelation forever stilled.

Nimos · Sep 12, 2019

adrian009 said:
I understand the difference between how an atheist such as yourself and a theist may view scripture. Some Jews and Christians are atheists. They would see human inspiration rather than God behind the stories of the Hebrew Bible and New Testament as you do. Obviously we can take exactly the same approach with Muhammad and the Quran along with Bahá’u’lláh and the Baha’i Writings. I am of course a theist and believe in the God of Abraham.

I agree and were I a believer, I would find understanding the scriptures correctly as being of the highest priority. I can't remember who mentioned it (Might have been Bart Ehrman) that its weird, that those that do actually believe in God and that the scriptures are inspired by God, have rarely read them. However if you ask them whether they have read some other popular book, like the Da vinci code by Dan Brown, its much more likely that they would answer yes to that. Yet his book is a fictional book meant for entertainment, whereas the scriptures are supposedly those of the Creator of everything and yet those that believe in it, do not seem to feel the same urge to read that.

For my self, I didn't come to the conclusion that God didn't exist just by deciding it. Even though my initial point were that I had my doubts about it, but at the same time I knew very little about it. It was first as I started to read the bible that I were convinced that he probably didn't and obviously later when I started to examine it in greater details.

Did you associate with any religion before deciding that Bahai were the right one, just wondering?

adrian009 said:
If we are fair in our judgment then Bahá’u’lláh through abolishing slavery by word and deed as early as the mid nineteenth century has already spearheaded an enormously positive social change. Consider also when He wrote to Queen Victoria proclaiming Himself the Promised One he praised the British Empire for abolishing slavery.

Don't get me wrong, despite me not agreeing with Baha'u'llah in what he is claiming, I find him far superior to those people in the bible. The moral standards that they apparently have gotten from God is horrific in pretty much all thinkable ways, so it takes very little to beat them, which include Jesus.

adrian009 said:
The Hebrew Bible, The New Testament and the Quran are all books that have formed the basis for great civilisations. One cannot pick and choose, rather must accept these sacred texts in their entirety.

With the stuff I wrote above (Below, had to split the text due to the 12000 limit, so moved it to the next post), do you accept that as something good in there entirety?

adrian009 said:
Most Christians will not see any contradiction in the Jesus presented through the differing Gospels such as Luke or John, and will not view any inconsistency between the God of the Hebrew Bible and New Testament.

Some will see contradictions and can live with it and to me that is probably the best approach, because its obvious that there are. And I don't think they are all that difficult to explain if one can accept that these texts were written by humans, based on stories that were told over lots of years. The issue is how one approach these and addresses the issues which will rise, that these texts were inspired or written by God and how God allowed them to be written and taught falsely throughout the years. So I think almost regardless of which view one have of scriptures, that you will run into problems. But again, I think those that can accept that there are contradictions are still better off than those that denies it.

adrian009 said:
The problem hasn’t been the sacred scripture themselves but interpretation.

Consider the sole verse in the Quran Muslims use to justify Muhammad as the seal of the prophets.

Muhammad is not the father of any of your men but the Messenger of Allah, and the seal of the Prophets: and Allah has knowledge of all things.
Quran 33:40

I completely agree and that is an issues with scriptures, when we can't ask those who wrote them, what exactly they believed and how they explain it. Obviously we today are looking at them from our moral perceptive and for instance the question of suffering, I think is much harder to explain today than it were for the Jews back then. Because how do we explain that God allows natural evil? Like earthquake killing X amount of people. Based on the OT, things seems to fit rather well together when viewed from the perspective of the Jews. They weren't able to observe what happened in other countries which had nothing to do with them, so when bad things happened it seems to follow a pattern, they do something that pisses of God and he punish them, with droughts, dieases, death etc. And when things are good its because they follow God. So I think to them it made rather good sense, why there were suffering. But as the religion started to spread and we got more and more knowledge, people started to ask questions about it. And eventually as science really started to kick off, its becoming even more difficult for religions to answer why suffering is in the world. A potential answer, even though I wouldn't support it my self to the full, is that since we don't follow the law as God instructed, he punish people, which seems to follow well with the bible at least. But yet it still doesn't explain why suffering happens to those that do not know about God. So to me it must be the most difficult question for anyone that believes in God to answer, and to me there doesn't really seem to be any good explanations for it.

Continue...

Nimos · Sep 12, 2019

adrian009 said:
I believe humanity was not able to universally abolish slavery until the nineteenth century. Moses, Jesus and Muhammad did not abolish slavery.

I don't know what Muhammad said about slavery, but at least for Moses and Jesus, they have never expressed or suggested that slavery is wrong, at least not to my knowledge. Rather it is more likely that they were in support of it. The law given to Moses included rules for how they were to treat their slaves, so there is no logical reason to assume that he would question or think that God was wrong about it. Why would he?

Regarding Jesus and Paul there doesn't seem to be any issue either, as Paul writes in Titus:

Titus
9 Teach slaves to be subject to their masters in everything, to try to please them, not to talk back to them, 10 and not to steal from them, but to show that they can be fully trusted, so that in every way they will make the teaching about God our Savior attractive.

Jesus in Luke say the following:
42 The Lord answered, “Who then is the faithful and wise manager, whom the master puts in charge of his servants to give them their food allowance at the proper time? 43 It will be good for that servant whom the master finds doing so when he returns. 44 Truly I tell you, he will put him in charge of all his possessions. 45 But suppose the servant says to himself, ‘My master is taking a long time in coming,’ and he then begins to beat the other servants, both men and women, and to eat and drink and get drunk. 46 The master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he is not aware of. He will cut him to pieces and assign him a place with the unbelievers.

47 “The servant who knows the master’s will and does not get ready or does not do what the master wants will be beaten with many blows. 48 But the one who does not know and does things deserving punishment will be beaten with few blows. From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked.

Now we have the same story in Matthew as well, just told slightly different:
45 “Who then is the faithful and wise servant, whom the master has put in charge of the servants in his household to give them their food at the proper time? 46 It will be good for that servant whose master finds him doing so when he returns. 47 Truly I tell you, he will put him in charge of all his possessions. 48 But suppose that servant is wicked and says to himself, ‘My master is staying away a long time,’ 49 and he then begins to beat his fellow servants and to eat and drink with drunkards. 50 The master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he is not aware of. 51 He will cut him to pieces and assign him a place with the hypocrites, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

I guess one could argue whether the word servant is correctly used here as we know that Jews working for other Jews were to be treated well/better than none Jews. However Jesus makes its pretty clear in what he is saying that the master of the servant is in their good right to kill them or beat them senseless should they please, if they do not do or act as the master have ordered.

If we compare that to the OT, I think it will make slightly more sense what is meant here, and that Jesus might actual, as he does with a lot of the other laws as well, make them more extreme than the original ones. So from Exodus the law say:

Exodus 21
12 “Anyone who strikes a person with a fatal blow is to be put to death. 13 However, if it is not done intentionally, but God lets it happen, they are to flee to a place I will designate. 14 But if anyone schemes and kills someone deliberately, that person is to be taken from my altar and put to death.

20 “Anyone who beats their male or female slave with a rod must be punished if the slave dies as a direct result, 21 but they are not to be punished if the slave recovers after a day or two, since the slave is their property.

So apparently Jesus seem to think that you can kill a slave straight up without any problems, even though God's law actually is "slightly" less brutal, as he won't even allow slaves to be killed like that or at least the master have to be sure that the slave survive and is only down for the count for a few days.

To me at least it doesn't seem like neither Moses or Jesus had any issues with slavery.

If we look at King David, which is considered one of the greatest Kings of Israel and favored by God as well (Not sure why as he seems pretty crazy, in fact his whole family seems completely insane to me) But then we have similar weird stories as well.

So David pretty quickly gets into a war with the house of Saul, Which is eventually ruled by one called Abner as Saul is killed. But they decide to make a pact, but David will only allow this if he gets Saul daughter which he bought for 100 Philistine foreskins, which apparently is just as good as money:

13 “Good,” said David. “I will make an agreement with you. But I demand one thing of you: Do not come into my presence unless you bring Michal daughter of Saul when you come to see me.” 14 Then David sent messengers to Ish-Bosheth son of Saul, demanding, “Give me my wife Michal, whom I betrothed to myself for the price of a hundred Philistine foreskins.”

15 So Ish-Bosheth gave orders and had her taken away from her husband Paltiel son of Laish. 16 Her husband, however, went with her, weeping behind her all the way to Bahurim. Then Abner said to him, “Go back home!” So he went back.

So apparently this were no issue either. Next in the story David's firstborn son Amnon decides to rape his brother's sister (think its his stepsister as David had, I don't know how many wives), to which his brother Absalom tells his sister the following:

20 Her brother Absalom said to her, “Has that Amnon, your brother, been with you? Be quiet for now, my sister; he is your brother. Don’t take this thing to heart.” And Tamar lived in her brother Absalom’s house, a desolate woman.

21 When King David heard all this, he was furious. 22 And Absalom never said a word to Amnon, either good or bad; he hated Amnon because he had disgraced his sister Tamar.

The above is really strange as Absalom do not seem all to concerned in verse 20, but then apparently is in 21, so maybe he just don't want her to make a scene or something. But in regards to David it doesn't seem to be a huge issue that one rapes their own family members as he doesn't punish Amnon in any way. So the story goes that Absalom then kills Amnon, which pisses off David, which eventually ends up forgiving him for doing so. But then Absalom plot to take the throne from David which he manage to do, and to really show that he have no respect for David decide to rape his wives in front of everyone.

20 Absalom said to Ahithophel, “Give us your advice. What should we do?”

21 Ahithophel answered, “Sleep with your father’s concubines whom he left to take care of the palace. Then all Israel will hear that you have made yourself obnoxious to your father, and the hands of everyone with you will be more resolute.” 22 So they pitched a tent for Absalom on the roof, and he slept with his father’s concubines in the sight of all Israel.

Anyway its a hell of a weird family, but at no point does any of them regard slavery or buying people for even foreskins as being something wrong, its basically told as if it completely normal and with God's blessing I guess, as he doesn't intervene in any of it. However when someone tries to prevent the Ark from falling from a carriage as its about to tip over. God instantly kills him for doing so, even though he is just trying to save it. Because as I mentioned to you in the last post, God really don't like people touching or looking into the Ark. And eventually God tricks David into making a count of the people in Israel, for which David forgets to collect money as it says in the law, so he commit a sin and God give him 3 choices of how he should be punished, where he chooses a plague, so God sends an angel to start killing the Israelites (70000 dead) But eventually as the angel is about to do it to Jerusalem, God, the all knowing, regrets and stops the angel. How God did not foresee this, is just another contradiction I guess

1 Again the anger of the Lord burned against Israel, and he incited David against them, saying, “Go and take a census of Israel and Judah.”

15 So the Lord sent a plague on Israel from that morning until the end of the time designated, and seventy thousand of the people from Dan to Beersheba died. 16 When the angel stretched out his hand to destroy Jerusalem, the Lord relented concerning the disaster and said to the angel who was afflicting the people, “Enough! Withdraw your hand.” The angel of the Lord was then at the threshing floor of Araunah the Jebusite.

17 When David saw the angel who was striking down the people, he said to the Lord, “I have sinned; I, the shepherd,[c] have done wrong. These are but sheep. What have they done? Let your hand fall on me and my family.”

Trailblazer · Sep 12, 2019

Nimos said:
I think you jump to conclusions, there is no reason for you to assume that Muhammad didn't think that this actually happened to him. And if you watch this explanation given by a muslim about how they view it, there are different views.

Also if you noticed that this event is more meaningful for the muslims than you simply claiming that its just a story and not to be taken literally.

Thanks for the video. I do not deny that Muhammad had these experiences, so I do not think it is “just a story” now that I know what happened. And as the video says there are different views as to whether it was physical or just spiritual, although that is not what is most important. It was the experience with God that matters. These are not unlike the experiences Baha’u’llah had with the Maid of heaven, and Baha’is look at that the same way Muslims look at Muhammad’s spiritual experiences. Much of what Muslims believe validates Baha’i beliefs; for example, the belief that all of the Messengers of God meet in the spiritual world.

Nimos said:
That there is one official interpretation doesn't especially make it any better, rather it gives UHJ monopol on what Bahai should and shouldn't believe and also unavoidable assume that they are the only ones with the authority to interpret former scriptures from which the Bahai faith reference.

From my point of view, having only one official translation avoids the confusion that other religions have with their scriptures over which translation is the correct one. You are assuming the conspiracy theory, that the UHJ is trying to control the Baha’is, and that theory has no backing, so it is just sheer paranoia on the part of non-Baha’is.

The UHJ has no authority to interpret the Writings of Baha’u’llah or any Baha’i Writings. their only job is to find qualified professional translators who are probably even Baha’is, to serve on committees and translate the Writings from Persian and Arabic into English and other languages. The UHJ painstakingly ensures that the Writings are translated as true to form as possible, such that the meaning is not lost from one language to another.

Nimos said:
So suddenly UHJ can decide which verses of the Bible and the Quran are supposedly true or not and which are mere stories. Obviously this is not going to go well with Christians and Muslims alike.

The UHJ has no authority to do any such thing! ~~ Only Baha’u’llah and Abdu’l-Baha and Shoghi Effendi had any such authority and to my knowledge only Baha’u’llah and Abdu’l-Baha commented upon the Bible, not Shoghi Effendi. Only is a few cases such as the resurrection and the ascension did Abdu’l-Baha weigh in and say those did not literally happen the way Christians believe they did, a body rising from the grave and a body floating up into the sky. In the Kitab-i-Iqan Baha’u’llah explained what many terms in the Bible mean; such as resurrection, clouds, moon, sun, etc.

Nimos said:
Its clear that the Bahai, might be the UHJ, don't know, have already drawn the conclusions which books of the bible are to be believed and which ain't, just as you have shown that its very easy to just point, at varies verses in the middle of stories, both in the Quran and the Bible and claim based on absolutely nothing, besides personal preferences, that they are not from God while the very next verse is. To me that seems like a very bad way to address scriptures.

AGAIN, the UHJ had no such authority and that is not their role within the Baha’i Faith. I think I once posted you their functions, here it is again: The function of the Universal House of Justice was outlined in the Writings of Baha'u'llah before it was possible for it to be formed. It is a legislative body of nine members elected from among the nations of the world where there are Baha'i National Spiritual Assemblies. It has authority to make decisions about principles or actions which are not expressly revealed in the Writings of Baha'u'llah. It also legislates as to when it is timely for certain of the Laws of Baha'u'llah in the Aqdas to be practiced. Finally, only the Universal House of Justice can declare any Baha'i to be a Covenant-breaker.

Nimos said:
God contradict himself constantly, lets take the story of the ten commandments in a summary:

This is right after God have told Moses "You shall not murder" and instantly he kills 3000 people and destroy the tablets that God gave him. How on earth is that not a contradiction? One solution is that this didn't happen either, I guess.

THAT is not a contradiction, because Moses was telling the Israelites not to murder but that does not mean that Moses cannot murder anyone, if He actually did. I do not really know if it happened; you will have to tale that up with your new friend Adrian, who knows a lot more about the Bible than I do.

I do not really know what you mean by contradictions and what you think they are, but I would not be surprised if the Bible has contradictions.

Nimos said:
But there is a huge difference here, some Christians believe that Jesus were the son of God. Others believe in the holy trinity that Jesus were God in human form. Whereas muslims think Jesus were just a prophet, these two views will not go well together for obvious reasons.

So how do you think we can know who Jesus really was? Baha is believe Jesus was the Son of man and the Son of Go, but not literally God’s son, because God does not have biological children. Rather, Jesus was like a son is to his father, a relationship of son to father. Also, Baha’is believe Jesus was a prophet and a Messenger of God and a Manifestation of God.

Jesus never claimed to be God so the Christians got that wrong. That was decided upon at councils such as Nicaea, because they did not know what to make of Jesus. But Jesus never claimed to be God.Jesus referred to Himself as a Prophet, and was so regarded. Jesus never referred to Himself as God.Christians invented that false doctrine and after that they just blithely ignored these verses they do not want to acknowledge:

Matthew 13:57 And they were offended in him. But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, save in his own country, and in his own house.

Luke 13:33 Nevertheless I must walk to day, and to morrow, and the day following: for it cannot be that a prophet perish out of Jerusalem.

Matthew 21:11 And the multitude said, This is Jesus the prophet of Nazareth of Galilee.

Luke 7:16 And there came a fear on all: and they glorified God, saying, That a great prophet is risen up among us; and, That God hath visited his people.

Nimos said:
But if we go as far as to say that we can't be sure that Jesus said any of the things he did in the bible, then there is no basis for Christianity at all, and it would eventually also ruin the Quran as it confirms Jesus. So if we reach a conclusion that Jesus didn't exist or said any of the things he did. Then the Quran would equally be false in claiming that Jesus were a prophet.

No, we cannot deny what is attributed to Jesus in the NT or everything after that falls apart. Not only Muhammad, but also Baha’u’llah referred to Jesus in their scriptures. The Muslims claimed that the Bible was corrupted, and I think they were referring to the NT, and Baha’u’llah chastised the Muslims for saying that. Addressing the Muslims, Baha’u’llah wrote:

“We have also heard a number of the foolish of the earth assert that the genuine text of the heavenly Gospel doth not exist amongst the Christians, that it hath ascended unto heaven. How grievously they have erred! How oblivious of the fact that such a statement imputeth the gravest injustice and tyranny to a gracious and loving Providence! How could God, when once the Day-star of the beauty of Jesus had disappeared from the sight of His people, and ascended unto the fourth heaven, cause His holy Book, His most great testimony amongst His creatures, to disappear also?” The Kitáb-i-Íqán, p. 89

“Our purpose in relating these things is to warn you that were they to maintain that those verses wherein the signs referred to in the Gospel are mentioned have been perverted, were they to reject them, and cling instead to other verses and traditions, you should know that their words were utter falsehood and sheer calumny. Yea “corruption” of the text, in the sense We have referred to, hath been actually effected in particular instances.” The Kitáb-i-Íqán, p. 88

Nimos said:
exactly the same as when I said that Muhammad would be lying if they accepted that Baha'u'llah is another prophet to come after him. I know its not an issue for you as a Bahai, but for muslims it surely is.

Can you quote me from the Qur’an where Muhammad said that no prophet would come after Him? He might have claimed to be the “seal of the prophets” and in a sense that is true because Muhammad sealed off the age of prophecy, so He was the last Prophet in that religious cycle. Moreover, Baha’u’llah as not just a prophet, he was a universal Manifestation of God, and so was the Bab.

Nimos said:
I think that is the problem, "but I am not going to believe God spoke to everyone the OT" Im not trying to convince you of whom God spoke to or didn't, which stories are true or not. Im simply quoting what the bible say, and in the book of Joshua, which follows after the death of Moses, im questioning how you or Fadl reach the conclusion that there is a switch here, between the story of Moses being divine and that of Joshua not.

No, Joshua was a very spiritual man but not a Prophet, let alone a Manifestation of God.

“The Manifestations of universal ProphethoodWho appeared independently are, for example, Abraham, Moses, Christ, Muhammad, the Báb and Bahá’u’lláh. But the others who are followers and promoters are like Solomon, David, Isaiah, Jeremiah and Ezekiel. For the independent Prophets are founders; They establish a new religion and make new creatures of men; They change the general morals, promote new customs and rules, renew the cycle and the Law. Their appearance is like the season of spring, which arrays all earthly beings in a new garment, and gives them a new life.

With regard to the second sort of Prophets who are followers, these also promote the Law of God, make known the Religion of God, and proclaim His word. Of themselves they have no power and might, except what they receive from the independent Prophets.”

That was an excerpt from the chapter; you can read the full chapter here:
43: THE TWO CLASSES OF PROPHETS, Some Answered Questions, pp. 164-165

Moses was a Prophet and a Manifestation of God because He received a revelation from God directly and later a religion (Judaism) was established in His name.

Nimos said:
Saw the video, thanks for sharing. I had hoped it had explained a bit more about what Baha'u'llah taught in greater details.

That was not the purpose of that video. Here is another video that might cover the teachings that better. I have not had time to view it all yet.

Light to the World: The life and teachings of Bahá’u’lláh

Dawnofhope · Sep 13, 2019

Nimos said:
I agree and were I a believer, I would find understanding the scriptures correctly as being of the highest priority. I can't remember who mentioned it (Might have been Bart Ehrman) that its weird, that those that do actually believe in God and that the scriptures are inspired by God, have rarely read them. However if you ask them whether they have read some other popular book, like the Da vinci code by Dan Brown, its much more likely that they would answer yes to that. Yet his book is a fictional book meant for entertainment, whereas the scriptures are supposedly those of the Creator of everything and yet those that believe in it, do not seem to feel the same urge to read that.

I do work in a volunteer Christian medical centre and I'm really the only one who isn't technically a Christian working there. One of my workmates spends an hour a day studying the Bible. We have some great conversations. However, I agree most Christians don't know their Bible very well. I like what Bart Ehrman has to say and have respect for his opinions even though he no longer believes in God. You have clearly read and thought about the Bible a great deal which I respect. Regardless of our beliefs, its an important book to study. I would much rather discuss the Bible with an atheist who can do so in a reasonable, courteous and respectful manner than a theist who is rude and arrogant.

Nimos said:
For my self, I didn't come to the conclusion that God didn't exist just by deciding it. Even though my initial point were that I had my doubts about it, but at the same time I knew very little about it. It was first as I started to read the bible that I were convinced that he probably didn't and obviously later when I started to examine it in greater details.

I agree there are parts of the Bible that are hard to reconcile with a just and loving God. Its one of the main reasons many people struggle with belief in God.

Nimos said:
Did you associate with any religion before deciding that Bahai were the right one, just wondering?

I’ve been a Baha’i for nearly 30 years but grew up as a Christian. I went through a period of search for about 5 years where I explored my Christian roots, Buddhism, Hinduism and atheism before becoming a Baha’i. During the years of search I lived for over 2 years in relative isolation meditating and contemplating the meaning of life. Ironically I wasn’t at all interested in religion in my teens being much more interested in music, sport, studies and friends. I did OK at school which led me into medicine. I’m a GP now but spent 7 years as a psychiatry intern.

Nimos said:
Don't get me wrong, despite me not agreeing with Baha'u'llah in what he is claiming, I find him far superior to those people in the bible. The moral standards that they apparently have gotten from God is horrific in pretty much all thinkable ways, so it takes very little to beat them, which include Jesus.

For me there is much to admire about Baha'u'llah in the way He lived His life as well as what He taught. Some of the Message He brought is much more relevant for today than what Muhammad and Jesus taught. There are Teachings that are universal and apply to any age.

Nimos said:
With the stuff I wrote above (Below, had to split the text due to the 12000 limit, so moved it to the next post), do you accept that as something good in there entirety?

We are talking in depth about the what is taught in some of the main world faiths.

Its hard to cover it in a few posts.

Nimos said:
Some will see contradictions and can live with it and to me that is probably the best approach, because its obvious that there are. And I don't think they are all that difficult to explain if one can accept that these texts were written by humans, based on stories that were told over lots of years. The issue is how one approach these and addresses the issues which will rise, that these texts were inspired or written by God and how God allowed them to be written and taught falsely throughout the years. So I think almost regardless of which view one have of scriptures, that you will run into problems. But again, I think those that can accept that there are contradictions are still better off than those that denies it.

I agree.

Dawnofhope · Sep 13, 2019

Nimos said:
I completely agree and that is an issues with scriptures, when we can't ask those who wrote them, what exactly they believed and how they explain it. Obviously we today are looking at them from our moral perceptive and for instance the question of suffering, I think is much harder to explain today than it were for the Jews back then. Because how do we explain that God allows natural evil? Like earthquake killing X amount of people. Based on the OT, things seems to fit rather well together when viewed from the perspective of the Jews. They weren't able to observe what happened in other countries which had nothing to do with them, so when bad things happened it seems to follow a pattern, they do something that pisses of God and he punish them, with droughts, dieases, death etc. And when things are good its because they follow God. So I think to them it made rather good sense, why there were suffering. But as the religion started to spread and we got more and more knowledge, people started to ask questions about it. And eventually as science really started to kick off, its becoming even more difficult for religions to answer why suffering is in the world. A potential answer, even though I wouldn't support it my self to the full, is that since we don't follow the law as God instructed, he punish people, which seems to follow well with the bible at least. But yet it still doesn't explain why suffering happens to those that do not know about God. So to me it must be the most difficult question for anyone that believes in God to answer, and to me there doesn't really seem to be any good explanations for it.

Its important to realise conditions today are unimaginably different from the times of Moses, Christ and Muhammad. With tribal warfare, there usually wasn’t mercy shown to the vanquished. Women and children were taken as slaves. Men were killed.

There wasn’t access to penal institutions. Chopping of part of an arm was a practical way of identifying thieves and a clear deterrent for others.

Men dominated by reason of their more forceful and aggressive qualities both physically and mentally.

Levels of education were poor. People didn’t live as long.

Earthquakes and other natural disasters have always been hard to come to terms with. If people are resilient, in part from having good character and doing the right thing, they were more likely to respond constructively to adversity.

Its clear if we live a moral and decent life, things are more likely to go well. There’s a clear narrative in the Hebrew Bible as well as the New Testament that if we obey God’s laws things are more likely to go well for us. Its not hard to see how being truthful and trustworthy leads to being better integrated into our communities.

To me the Baha’i Writings provide clarity and inspiration as to the nature of tests and difficulties and how best to respond. For example:

Does the soul progress more through sorrow or through the joy in this world?’
‘Abdu’l-Bahá.—‘The mind and spirit of man advance when he is tried by suffering. The more the ground is ploughed the better the seed will grow, the better the harvest will be. Just as the plough furrows the earth deeply, purifying it of weeds and thistles, so suffering and tribulation free man from the petty affairs of this worldly life until he arrives at a state of complete detachment. His attitude in this world will be that of divine happiness. Man is, so to speak, unripe: the heat of the fire of suffering will mature him. Look back to the times past and you will find that the greatest men have suffered most.’
‘He who through suffering has attained development, should he fear happiness?’
‘Abdu’l-Bahá.—‘Through suffering he will attain to an eternal happiness which nothing can take from him. The apostles of Christ suffered: they attained eternal happiness.’
‘Then it is impossible to attain happiness without suffering?’
‘Abdu’l-Bahá.—‘To attain eternal happiness one must suffer. He who has reached the state of self-sacrifice has true joy. Temporal joy will vanish.’

Bahá'í Reference Library - Paris Talks, Pages 178-179

Dawnofhope · Sep 13, 2019

Nimos said:
I don't know what Muhammad said about slavery, but at least for Moses and Jesus, they have never expressed or suggested that slavery is wrong, at least not to my knowledge. Rather it is more likely that they were in support of it. The law given to Moses included rules for how they were to treat their slaves, so there is no logical reason to assume that he would question or think that God was wrong about it. Why would he?

The narrative around Muhammad is he united a group of disparate tribes on the Arabian peninsula who by the limited accounts available were often warring and infanticide was practiced amongst some tribes. Muhammad’s own tribe the Quraysh managed what is now the kabba in Mecca. There were hundreds of gods that brought visitors and money to the region.

Quraysh - Wikipedia

Muhammad teaching that there was just one God was bad for business and so the Quraysh resolved to destroy Muhammad and the Muslims. Muhammad and His followers eventually fled to Medina. The Muslims and a neighbouring Jewish tribe Banu Qurayza made a peace pact.

Banu Qurayza - Wikipedia

Eventually when the Quraysh pursued the Muslims and attacked them in Medina, Banu Qurayza violated the treaty by engaging with the Quraysh thus committing treason. When the Muslims were eventually victorious Banu Qurayzh surrendered to the Muslims. Because of the charge of treason the men were beheaded and the women and children taken as slaves.

The actual historical evidence to support this happening is highly questionable as it derived from a book called the Sirat Rasul Allah whose reliability is not so good.

Prophetic biography - Wikipedia

Nimos said:
Regarding Jesus and Paul there doesn't seem to be any issue either, as Paul writes in Titus:

That is pretty obvious I agree. Jesus and Paul essentially supported the status quo in regards slavery.

Nimos said:
Titus
9 Teach slaves to be subject to their masters in everything, to try to please them, not to talk back to them, 10 and not to steal from them, but to show that they can be fully trusted, so that in every way they will make the teaching about God our Savior attractive.

Basically, be a good slave.

Nimos said:
Jesus in Luke say the following:
42 The Lord answered, “Who then is the faithful and wise manager, whom the master puts in charge of his servants to give them their food allowance at the proper time? 43 It will be good for that servant whom the master finds doing so when he returns. 44 Truly I tell you, he will put him in charge of all his possessions. 45 But suppose the servant says to himself, ‘My master is taking a long time in coming,’ and he then begins to beat the other servants, both men and women, and to eat and drink and get drunk. 46 The master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he is not aware of. He will cut him to pieces and assign him a place with the unbelievers.

47 “The servant who knows the master’s will and does not get ready or does not do what the master wants will be beaten with many blows. 48 But the one who does not know and does things deserving punishment will be beaten with few blows. From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked

Although a parable the use of masters and slaves is very familiar to all. No doubt many slaves were treated badly.

Nimos said:
Now we have the same story in Matthew as well, just told slightly different:
45 “Who then is the faithful and wise servant, whom the master has put in charge of the servants in his household to give them their food at the proper time? 46 It will be good for that servant whose master finds him doing so when he returns. 47 Truly I tell you, he will put him in charge of all his possessions. 48 But suppose that servant is wicked and says to himself, ‘My master is staying away a long time,’ 49 and he then begins to beat his fellow servants and to eat and drink with drunkards. 50 The master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he is not aware of. 51 He will cut him to pieces and assign him a place with the hypocrites, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Nimos said:
I guess one could argue whether the word servant is correctly used here as we know that Jews working for other Jews were to be treated well/better than none Jews. However Jesus makes its pretty clear in what he is saying that the master of the servant is in their good right to kill them or beat them senseless should they please, if they do not do or act as the master have ordered.

Its certainly not a discourse about the evils of slavery.

Nimos · Sep 13, 2019

Trailblazer said:
From my point of view, having only one official translation avoids the confusion that other religions have with their scriptures over which translation is the correct one. You are assuming the conspiracy theory, that the UHJ is trying to control the Baha’is, and that theory has no backing, so it is just sheer paranoia on the part of non-Baha’is.

Im not suggesting it in the way you might think.

Trailblazer said:
The UHJ has no authority to do any such thing! ~~ Only Baha’u’llah and Abdu’l-Baha and Shoghi Effendi had any such authority and to my knowledge only Baha’u’llah and Abdu’l-Baha commented upon the Bible, not Shoghi Effendi. Only is a few cases such as the resurrection and the ascension did Abdu’l-Baha weigh in and say those did not literally happen the way Christians believe they did, a body rising from the grave and a body floating up into the sky. In the Kitab-i-Iqan Baha’u’llah explained what many terms in the Bible mean; such as resurrection, clouds, moon, sun, etc.

But whether its only those people that you mention here that had such authority, I don't see how that is changing anything. Because that assumption is that these are correct. You have already stated before that Baha'u'llah already fulfilled all the prophecies in the bible and that it is of him that it speaks. Even as an atheist, having nothing to loose would I accept what you are saying, I disagree with you. The bible does not speak of him and that Baha'u'llah understanding of these things does not add up with what the bible say and historical what the Jews believed. Now if he have the authority to say these things, but no one else have, as you said. Assuming that everyone converted to Bahai's over night. everyone would simply have to accept what he is saying, regardless of there being anything to back up his claim. That is what I mean with giving them monopoly on how things ought to be understood. And they simply doesn't add up to what seems to be most likely.

Trailblazer said:
It has authority to make decisions about principles or actions which are not expressly revealed in the Writings of Baha'u'llah.

Is the bible and the Quran expressly revealed in the Writings of Baha'u'llah? Does he go through all the scriptures and if not would that mean that the UHJ have authority to make decisions about them? Or what would prevent them from doing so, according to what you wrote here?

Trailblazer said:
THAT is not a contradiction, because Moses was telling the Israelites not to murder but that does not mean that Moses cannot murder anyone, if He actually did. I do not really know if it happened; you will have to tale that up with your new friend Adrian, who knows a lot more about the Bible than I do.

I do not really know what you mean by contradictions and what you think they are, but I would not be surprised if the Bible has contradictions.

Its not really all that important whether these events actually happened or not. Its about what those that originally believed in God thought about him and what the nature of God was. Because that is the same God other people proclaim to believe in. However if they constantly, whenever God does something unexpected to them, denies it. Then there will be nothing left of that God. If we assume that this event didn't really happen, then there is no reason to assume that Moses received the 10 commandments either. Because we have no other stories telling us that he might have received them in some other way. Eventually as we start to reject more and more stories of the bible, there are so little left, that to even assume that we know anything about the God which the ancient Jews believed in, would be ridiculous as it would be based on guessing, with nothing to back up what people actually believed. Meaning that anyone could just make up whatever nature of God they wanted and it would be an as equally valid opinion as anyone else.

To really try to show this with some examples (Not saying that this is what you actually believe, its just examples).

- You don't really think Moses did as described in the story. So logically you would also have to admit that there is no reason to believe he got the 10 commandments either.

- I don't believe in Adam and Eve, so we remove that as well. Logically if Adam and Eve is wrong then most of OT falls apart, but lets ignore that for now.

- Another person say that clearly the flood didn't happen and there is no way for Noah to have build such ark.

And the list go on with varies people denying whatever story they don't agree with. All of these denials are equally valid, whatever story people believe is false is just as likely to be correct as any other story, when looking at this from a perspective of faith. What im not saying, and its important to be aware of that difference, is that we not talking about whether one believe that these happened exactly as the bible say they did. I think only the creationists will go that far. But its about throwing out part of the faith for which this God is build on. Which means that if you at some point say: "People ought to follow the ten commandments", to which I ask you: "Why should we do that?" You could then reply, "because they were given to us by God", as an atheist I deny that for obvious reasons, since don't believe in him, so I couldn't care less whether you believe that God gave them to us or not. The reason I would answer like that, is because until you can proof to me that God exist, then I see no reason to follow anything that is written in the scriptures. The reason I can answer like that, is because I don't do it based on faith in the scriptures, believing that they are inspired by God. So my answer would obviously differ from an answer by someone that have faith in them. So if people go around and just throw out whatever stories they don't agree with, are they all that different from atheists? We just throw out a whole lot more of them

But in the end, one that believe will have hardly anything left, that they might as well become atheists as well or at least admit that they have no clue what this God they believe in is. I hope you can see the difference here between faith and none faith.

The same goes when people start to believe or interpret scriptures out of context, the meaning and understanding of God, simply falls apart. So when Baha'u'llah, as you say, starts to explain what all this about clouds, sun etc. actually means, but it having no valid reason for being true in relationship to what the stories say, what we know about the ancient Jews and what they believed in, as we get most of this information from these scriptures. Then God as we know him starts to crumble and have very little with that found in the Bible or Hebrew bible. And without that, then there is no Bahai or Islamic God. But rather you have someone's opinion about what a potential God might be like, and you can agree with that or not and basically the only information you have about him is from that person's mouth.

Trailblazer said:
No, we cannot deny what is attributed to Jesus in the NT or everything after that falls apart. Not only Muhammad, but also Baha’u’llah referred to Jesus in their scriptures. The Muslims claimed that the Bible was corrupted, and I think they were referring to the NT, and Baha’u’llah chastised the Muslims for saying that. Addressing the Muslims, Baha’u’llah wrote:

I don't know if the muslims only think that about the NT, but logically there is no reason to believe that the OT is not either as far as I can see. Obviously you have people that might have certain agendas with the NT, but even though, if we look at the Gospels and how Jesus speaks about those in charge, its clear that things are not really going according to what Jesus think they should. Which could indicate that people at the time, especially those in power, might have "corrupted" the teachings as well. I have no clue, but I think, its a possibility and can't see why it wouldn't be case if its like that with pretty much all other religions as well.

Trailblazer said:
Can you quote me from the Qur’an where Muhammad said that no prophet would come after Him?

No, I can't and my guess is that there are different views of this among muslims. but some quick research, seems to suggest that some say that this only apply to law bearing prophets. But again, as I mentioned earlier, Im not all that well into Islam. But then again, Im not the one you have to convince, but rather the muslims that disagree with you and that could probably be an interesting discussion. But its outside, my knowledge of Islam, that I would be able to give any valid answers to it.

I found this article which gives their view on it. But again you can read it, but I have no clue if this is what the majority of muslims agree with, but in it the person say the following and there are some quotes as well:

It is worth also noting some Ahadith that to the lay reader may suggest that prophethood ended with Prophet Muhammad(sa). However when studied further it is clear that they cannot mean support the claim that prophethood has ceased altogether.

One of these hadith is:

‘There is no prophet after me’ (Bukhari)

However, the Holy Prophet(sa) here is referring to a law-bearing prophet. This interpretation is further clarified and confirmed by Hazrat Ayesha(ra), wife of the Holy Prophet(sa), who said,

‘O ye people you should say that the Holy Prophet is Khataman Nabiyyeen, but do not say that there will be no prophet after him.’ (Durr e Manthoor, vol. 5, p.386).

Another hadith often quoted is:

‘I am the last prophet.’ (Sunan Nassai, Vol. 2, p.35).

Here the Holy Prophet(sa) is again referring to law-bearing prophets. This is clear from the full version of the hadith which states,

‘I am the last of the prophets and my mosque is the last mosque.’ (Sunan Nassai, vol. 2, p.35).

By juxtaposing prophet with mosque, the Holy Prophet(sa) is simply implying that there will be no prophet like him just as there will be no mosque equal in glory or piety to his mosque. Future prophets, just as mosques, will be a reflection of his prophethood and mosque.

Can there be Prophets after Prophet Muhammad (saw)? | Islam Ahmadiyya

Nimos · Sep 13, 2019

Trailblazer said:
That was not the purpose of that video. Here is another video that might cover the teachings that better. I have not had time to view it all yet.

Light to the World: The life and teachings of Bahá’u’lláh

Guess I have to be a bit careful here, so you don't misunderstand me. The video is basically a commercial for Baha'u'llah, it does explain his life, but you are constantly bombarded with how much good comes from this. The reason I say Im a bit careful is to avoid you misunderstanding me, but the way the video is presented and why I see it the way I do, is because it doesn't handle any of the difficult questions and provide no answers to anything. Basically the video follows a pattern like this... 1. Tell a bit about Baha'u'llah and his life 2. Interview random Bahai believers that tells how wonderful everything is because of him. 3. Throw in some quotes from the writings of Baha'u'llah. And it pretty much repeat this pattern all the way.

That in it self is not an issue, because you would expect people committed to a religion to praise it as being the best. Also im not against what Baha'u'llah as such is saying about unity, I just don't find it all that special, compared to what other people, which do not proclaim to be a messenger of God have said as well. Also as I have already mentioned to you before, it is not clear to me which God we are really talking about here. I assume that its the God of the OT, as one of the persons in the video make a comment that God was not only for the Jews. But besides that, God is just talked about as God, exactly as I imagined it, when I asked you which God it was that Bahai believe in. Because there is no explanations to how these different religious views are to come together or how they fit together, there is just a call for unity, which those in the video obviously agree with and think is good, which I myself agree with, so again nothing wrong with that approach. From the video, I again get the impression that its the word and character of Baha'u'llah that is important to them and God is just whatever floating around. Maybe im being unfair as it is a video about Baha'u'llah or maybe its because, as again its extremely difficult to figure out what God you believe in and that Bahai's might not really be sure either. Which would make sense as you are trying to fit a lot of Gods and natures of Gods into one or maybe its simply unclear to me, which is most likely the case. But have Baha'u'llah written anything specifically about God, like we for instance find in the OT, where we can learn about him and what the ancient Jews believed in?

Try to watch this video its only 3.5 minute long and see if it reminds you of the other video, like what the visuals tries to tell you, the message of video etc.?

Muffled · Sep 13, 2019

JJ50 said:
We should live this life to the full, I am of the opinion when we die, end of story. I hope I am right, the idea of any afterlife involving the unpleasant Biblical god would be one's worst nightmare!

I believe the nightmare will become quite real for the wicked but I hope to obtain a favor or two.

Muffled · Sep 13, 2019

Thief said:
how about?....spending the rest of eternity
with people that think and feel as you do
and no One is Charge

what?.....no order or discipline in the next life?

we have hierarchy in this life
I suspect Hierarchy in the next

fearing God is not a bad thing
we humans fear what we cannot outrun or subdue

but eternal darkness is physically real
if you escape the grave.....fine and good

but you cannot escape heaven
or hell

I believe a lot of people skip Heaven. One does not have a choice when it comes to Hell.

Muffled · Sep 13, 2019

Trailblazer said:
You won't see God unless you want to see Him, and He won't be the Biblical God, He will just be the one true God.

I believe the Biblical God is the one true God and any other god is a false god.

Nimos · Sep 13, 2019

adrian009 said:
I agree there are parts of the Bible that are hard to reconcile with a just and loving God. Its one of the main reasons many people struggle with belief in God.

But you believe in an all loving God correct? So where do you get those information or believe from that he is?. As I also mentioned to Trailblazer, I find this very confusing in regards to Bahais.

So on Bahai.org (Assume they know what they are talking about?), they write this :

(An Unknowable God | What Bahá’ís Believe)
An Unknowable God
God, the Creator of the universe, is all-knowing, all-loving and all-merciful.

It is impossible for any mortal mind to truly understand the reality of God. Whatever is created can never comprehend or describe its creator. A table, for example, is incapable of understanding the craftsman who made it, even though his skills and attributes may be reflected in his creation.

This is a very strange comparison, a table is a mindless object, so how should it be able to understand anything regardless of what it is. A human is a living and thinking being capable of abstract thinking about its own existence. More importantly it seems to suggest that we won't be able to truly understand the reality of God and since he created us we won't be able to comprehend or even describe him. If that is the case, then how do we even know he exists? How would we be able to know that he created anything? Like the table example to follow along with that, how would one assume that if the table is incapable of understanding the craftsman who made it, then how on Earth would it be able to understand who made the chair? Ain't that exactly the same with humans, if we don't know our craftsman, then we wouldn't be able to understand who created another animal either? Its a very strange comparison I think. Anyway it continues:

A rock cannot imagine the growing power of a plant; a tree is unable to understand the powers of sight, hearing, smell or movement possessed by an animal; and an animal will never attain the consciousness that distinguishes a human being.

There are a lot of assumptions here and misleading comparisons, a rock is not the same as a plant, just as a tree is not the same as an animal. So why even make such analogy, which make no sense at all? Humans is an animal, there is nothing to suggest otherwise when looking at our biology. What sets us apart is mostly our brain.

We know that our earlier ancestors had there ways with the neanderthals as we find their DNA in us. And we know that they were also intelligent. So if modern humans are not animals, but chosen by God, then the neanderthals must have been animals based on what is stated above? So how did they developer their intelligence?

human-evolution-family-tree-with-skulls-graphic-hero.jpg.thumb.1920.1920.png

The most likely reason that other great apes haven't developed a brain like we have, is because there were no evolutionary need for it. There is nothing in evolution that suggest that a human brain is better than anything else when it comes to surviving. Ants for instance are way more succesful than we are, the only reason we consider ourselves as being special is because we tend to think of humans as being better and more complete than other species. But from "nature's" point of view, we are just another animal. The only ones on Earth that are suggesting that we are different, is us, nature doesn't support it in any way.

Throughout the ages, humanity’s spiritual, intellectual and moral capacities have been cultivated by the Founders of the great religions, among them Abraham, Krishna, Zoroaster, Moses, Buddha, Jesus Christ, Muhammad, and—in more recent times—the Báb and Bahá’u’lláh.

These Figures are not simply ordinary people with a greater knowledge than others. Rather they are Manifestations of God, Who have exerted an incomparable influence on the evolution of human society. While each of Them has a distinct individuality and a definite mission, the Manifestations of God all share in a single, divinely-ordained purpose—to “educate the souls of men, and refine the character of every living man…”1

So eventually as far as I can understand it, it all falls on the manifestations of God, which is basically just people or figures that seem to have been succesful in claiming that they are and convince other of it as well.

Since the purpose of all these divine “mirrors” is one and the same, no distinction should be made between Them.

If all the great religions can be considered to be one in essence, founded upon the same reality, how then can we understand the differences—particularly regarding social practices—between the teachings of the various Manifestations of God?

Each Manifestation may be seen as a skilled physician. He has a complete grasp of the nature of the body of humanity and is able to prescribe the appropriate cure for the ills of the world—one that best meets the requirements of the time in which He appears.

Yet this does still not explain, how God can be said to be "all-knowing, all-loving and all-merciful." still it doesn't answer any of the issues that is found in the scriptures regarding God and what he does. If Bahais believe that God in all these religions are one and the same and that no distinction should be made between them. Don't you have the same issues as any Christian, Jew or muslim have when they claim that God is all-knowing, all-loving etc. ?

adrian009 said:
Levels of education were poor. People didn’t live as long.

Depends if you believe the bible:

5 Altogether, Adam lived a total of 930 years, and then he died.
8 Altogether, Seth lived a total of 912 years, and then he died.
11 Altogether, Enosh lived a total of 905 years, and then he died.
14 Altogether, Kenan lived a total of 910 years, and then he died.
17 Altogether, Mahalalel lived a total of 895 years, and then he died.
20 Altogether, Jared lived a total of 962 years, and then he died.
.....and it goes on like that for a bit

adrian009 said:
Its clear if we live a moral and decent life, things are more likely to go well. There’s a clear narrative in the Hebrew Bible as well as the New Testament that if we obey God’s laws things are more likely to go well for us. Its not hard to see how being truthful and trustworthy leads to being better integrated into our communities.

Its a good point, because the Jews always complain about how hard they have it, whenever God is not there, but then God comes and save them and then eventually God punish them and kills them in huge numbers. Its really strange, it doesn't seem like the Jews had it well, whether God were with them or not, they always seems to end up dead in the stories one way or another.

It would be very interesting to speak to an ancient Jew or just be able to live with one of them for a week or so and observe what on Earth was going on and what they believed. They must have lived in almost constant fear from pretty much everything.

Dawnofhope · Sep 13, 2019

Nimos said:
But you believe in an all loving God correct? So where do you get those information or believe from that he is?. As I also mentioned to Trailblazer, I find this very confusing in regards to Bahais.

So on Bahai.org (Assume they know what they are talking about?), they write this :

(An Unknowable God | What Bahá’ís Believe)
An Unknowable God
God, the Creator of the universe, is all-knowing, all-loving and all-merciful.

It is impossible for any mortal mind to truly understand the reality of God. Whatever is created can never comprehend or describe its creator. A table, for example, is incapable of understanding the craftsman who made it, even though his skills and attributes may be reflected in his creation.

This is a very strange comparison, a table is a mindless object, so how should it be able to understand anything regardless of what it is. A human is a living and thinking being capable of abstract thinking about its own existence. More importantly it seems to suggest that we won't be able to truly understand the reality of God and since he created us we won't be able to comprehend or even describe him. If that is the case, then how do we even know he exists? How would we be able to know that he created anything? Like the table example to follow along with that, how would one assume that if the table is incapable of understanding the craftsman who made it, then how on Earth would it be able to understand who made the chair? Ain't that exactly the same with humans, if we don't know our craftsman, then we wouldn't be able to understand who created another animal either? Its a very strange comparison I think. Anyway it continues:

A rock cannot imagine the growing power of a plant; a tree is unable to understand the powers of sight, hearing, smell or movement possessed by an animal; and an animal will never attain the consciousness that distinguishes a human being.

There are a lot of assumptions here and misleading comparisons, a rock is not the same as a plant, just as a tree is not the same as an animal. So why even make such analogy, which make no sense at all? Humans is an animal, there is nothing to suggest otherwise when looking at our biology. What sets us apart is mostly our brain.

It is a metaphor that makes perfect sense to me. I wonder if you are taking it too literally. There are some things that are completely beyond our comprehension to understand. The essential reality of God is unknowable. The reality of the Manifestation of God is more accessible and how we best come to know God.

I completely accept you don’t believe this to be true. The ideas presented about how we can’t know God through metaphor seem crystal clear though.

The argument that humans are just another animal based on biology is valid. In that sense we are just animals. However in regards some of our mental capabilities we are clearly much more advanced.

Nimos said:
We know that our earlier ancestors had there ways with the neanderthals as we find their DNA in us. And we know that they were also intelligent. So if modern humans are not animals, but chosen by God, then the neanderthals must have been animals based on what is stated above? So how did they developer their intelligence?

The most likely reason that other great apes haven't developed a brain like we have, is because there were no evolutionary need for it. There is nothing in evolution that suggest that a human brain is better than anything else when it comes to surviving. Ants for instance are way more succesful than we are, the only reason we consider ourselves as being special is because we tend to think of humans as being better and more complete than other species. But from "nature's" point of view, we are just another animal. The only ones on Earth that are suggesting that we are different, is us, nature doesn't support it in any way.

Yet despite all our biological deficiencies here we are using technology invented by humans discussing concepts incomprehensible to any other animal apart from humans.

Nimos said:
Throughout the ages, humanity’s spiritual, intellectual and moral capacities have been cultivated by the Founders of the great religions, among them Abraham, Krishna, Zoroaster, Moses, Buddha, Jesus Christ, Muhammad, and—in more recent times—the Báb and Bahá’u’lláh.

These Figures are not simply ordinary people with a greater knowledge than others. Rather they are Manifestations of God, Who have exerted an incomparable influence on the evolution of human society. While each of Them has a distinct individuality and a definite mission, the Manifestations of God all share in a single, divinely-ordained purpose—to “educate the souls of men, and refine the character of every living man…”1

So eventually as far as I can understand it, it all falls on the manifestations of God, which is basically just people or figures that seem to have been succesful in claiming that they are and convince other of it as well.

As I understand it, if we want to know God and become closer to Him, His Manifestations are very important. Once again the concept is easy but doesn’t necessarily result in having faith in God’s existence. You appear to have a good working knowledge of the Bible. You have some knowledge of Islam and you are well on your way to understanding the Baha’i Faith. Whether or not you acquire faith in God, its certainly valuable to learn about the faith and cultures of other peoples.

Nimos said:
Since the purpose of all these divine “mirrors” is one and the same, no distinction should be made between Them.

If all the great religions can be considered to be one in essence, founded upon the same reality, how then can we understand the differences—particularly regarding social practices—between the teachings of the various Manifestations of God?

Each Manifestation may be seen as a skilled physician. He has a complete grasp of the nature of the body of humanity and is able to prescribe the appropriate cure for the ills of the world—one that best meets the requirements of the time in which He appears.

Yet this does still not explain, how God can be said to be "all-knowing, all-loving and all-merciful." still it doesn't answer any of the issues that is found in the scriptures regarding God and what he does. If Bahais believe that God in all these religions are one and the same and that no distinction should be made between them. Don't you have the same issues as any Christian, Jew or muslim have when they claim that God is all-knowing, all-loving etc. ?

The questions are the same for all of us, regardless of religion or worldview. For me, the Baha’i Writings makes a great deal more sense and provides better tools for grappling with those questions.

Nimos said:
Depends if you believe the bible:

5 Altogether, Adam lived a total of 930 years, and then he died.
8 Altogether, Seth lived a total of 912 years, and then he died.
11 Altogether, Enosh lived a total of 905 years, and then he died.
14 Altogether, Kenan lived a total of 910 years, and then he died.
17 Altogether, Mahalalel lived a total of 895 years, and then he died.
20 Altogether, Jared lived a total of 962 years, and then he died.
.....and it goes on like that for a bit

Baha’is don’t take those years literally.

Nimos said:
Its a good point, because the Jews always complain about how hard they have it, whenever God is not there, but then God comes and save them and then eventually God punish them and kills them in huge numbers. Its really strange, it Adoesn't seem like the Jews had it well, whether God were with them or not, they always seems to end up dead in the stories one way or another.

The Jewish people established a successful civilisation starting from the conquest of the land of Canaan, reaching its peak through King David and eventually ending with the diaspora after the Roman siege of Jerusalem in 66-70 AD. Their culture has continued and they have their own nation again. I think they could do with an updated theology but that’s just my bias.

Nimos said:
It would be very interesting to speak to an ancient Jew or just be able to live with one of them for a week or so and observe what on Earth was going on and what they believed. They must have lived in almost constant fear from pretty much everything.

I don’t think they feared (respected) God enough and that led to their downfall.

Nimos · Sep 13, 2019

adrian009 said:
It is a metaphor that makes perfect sense to me. I wonder if you are taking it too literally. There are some things that are completely beyond our comprehension to understand. The essential reality of God is unknowable. The reality of the Manifestation of God is more accessible and how we best come to know God.

Maybe I am

But to me if we translate it into metaphoric language

a lot like saying the following. We as tables are unable to understand our craftsman, however there are some tables among us, that knows the craftsman and they can tell the rest of us about him, because these tables are extra special. However there is no way for us to observe or test why these are any different, neither are they themselves able to proof it. So for some unexplained reason we just have to accept that these tables are special and believe in them, because that is what they claim.

To hide behind "manifestations" because it somehow makes it more accessible seems highly unlikely to be true. If God is unable to convince people himself, how on Earth does he expect humans to be able to do it? The whole setup seems a bit strange wouldn't you say?

Here you have, what must be considered the most knowledgeable being ever, capable of everything, but yet he is unable to make himself more accessible to mere humans than these "manifestations"? Clearly the Jews must have been able to grasp what God was as him and the angels were all around and interacted with them. But suddenly that whole understanding just went away, because humans just couldn't understand it anymore? So again, hope you see why its so difficult to understand the Bahai God view. It just seems extremely vague. Because from that website it say that there is no difference between God of the different religions they are all the same and true. Yet he is unknowable, despite the Jews having written about him, so obvious the majority of what the Jews wrote must be wrong according to Bahai? Because the Jews didn't have huge problems understanding what God was, they had problems doing what he told them to and kept pissing him off. So the ancient Jews understood God, but the modern day Jews don't, because now he is unknowable and can only be known through Baha'u'llah and the other manifestations? Even though Moses were a manifestation and the Jews still knew God, he was just the one that interacted on the behalf of the Jews. In the last story about David where God sends an angel that kills 70000 Jews, that whole story must clearly be a lie according to the Bahai faith and pretty much all other stories in the Bible, because there are hardly any of them where God is not interacting or making his present known to the Jews, either by giving them commands or killing them, obviously if we assume that the stories are true, these people that witness it, would have known that it was God, right?

I hope you see why its so confusing, because to me it seems a lot like the main idea of Baha'u'llah is unity between people, religions and helping the poor etc. All of which are very noble and good things, so no issues there. But the moment you just scratch the surface in regards to God and the actual believe it just seem to crumble completely as nothing really seems to fit with anything we know. So don't misunderstand me, as if im trying to say that we have to take the stories of the bible literal, even though some people do, but simply looking at the beliefs and faith in these scriptures and how they fit with the Bahai teachings, just doesn't seem to work.

Lets try to just work with one story, maybe that will make it more clear for me, because I would like to understand it better.

So the story of Sodom and Gomorrah that were destroyed. (Genesis 19)

Briefly how it goes, So God notice how wicked the people are in those cities and makes a deal with Abraham that if he can find just 5 people that are decent he will spare them, so he send two angels to Sodom to check things out, they then spend the night with Lot, But all the men in the city want to have sex with them... for whatever reason, think they are just wicked.. anyway Lot then flees with his wife and two daughters and are told to not look back as God destroy the cities or they themselves will die, which Lots wife does, so she is killed.

23 By the time Lot reached Zoar, the sun had risen over the land. 24 Then the Lord rained down burning sulfur on Sodom and Gomorrah—from the Lord out of the heavens. 25 Thus he overthrew those cities and the entire plain, destroying all those living in the cities—and also the vegetation in the land. 26 But Lot’s wife looked back, and she became a pillar of salt.

Now Lot and his daughter flees to a cave in the mountains, where they basically get him so drunk that he passes out and they both "rape" him which gets both of them pregnant. (Again a freaking weird story)

However, lets assume that its true, wouldn't you think that the Jews knew about God doing this, know about his angels walking among them. I mean the people in the story doesn't really seem all that impressed about seeing Gods angels as they pretty much goes straight to just wanting to have sex with them.

1 The two angels arrived at Sodom in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gateway of the city. When he saw them, he got up to meet them and bowed down with his face to the ground. 2 “My lords,” he said, “please turn aside to your servant’s house. You can wash your feet and spend the night and then go on your way early in the morning.”

“No,” they answered, “we will spend the night in the square.”

3 But he insisted so strongly that they did go with him and entered his house. He prepared a meal for them, baking bread without yeast, and they ate. 4 Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom—both young and old—surrounded the house. 5 They called to Lot, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them.”

How do you see this story or the meaning of it? Do you believe angels exist? and do you think that the Jews just lied about all of this? Because I guess that you can find some that believe the story to be true. So how do Bahais relate to it, how would you explain to me, if I told you that I believed the story were true, that its not? Did Baha'u'llah say that this didn't happen or how do you as a Bahai reach the conclusion that it didn't?

adrian009 said:
Yet despite all our biological deficiencies here we are using technology invented by humans discussing concepts incomprehensible to any other animal apart from humans.

Who or what were the neanderthals according to the Bahais and how do they fit into all of this? How do you explain their DNA found in us today?

Trailblazer · Sep 13, 2019

Muffled said:
I believe the Biblical God is the one true God and any other god is a false god.

I fully agree. The Biblical God is the one true God.

Dawnofhope · Sep 15, 2019

Nimos said:
Maybe I am

But to me if we translate it into metaphoric language a lot like saying the following. We as tables are unable to understand our craftsman, however there are some tables among us, that knows the craftsman and they can tell the rest of us about him, because these tables are extra special. However there is no way for us to observe or test why these are any different, neither are they themselves able to proof it. So for some unexplained reason we just have to accept that these tables are special and believe in them, because that is what they claim.

Hmmm. The purpose of a metaphor is to convey some truth, not to confuse and beguile!

Nimos said:
To hide behind "manifestations" because it somehow makes it more accessible seems highly unlikely to be true. If God is unable to convince people himself, how on Earth does he expect humans to be able to do it? The whole setup seems a bit strange wouldn't you say?

It may seem strange but that's the history of humanity. The end result is that the majority of the earths inhabitants believe in at least one of the manifestations of God.

FT_17.04.05_projectionsUpdate_globalPop640px.png

Those figures show 55% of the worlds population believe in either Muhammad or Jesus. If you look at projected population growth those figures are set to rise with Islam becoming the largest religion on the planet in about 50 years.

Why Muslims are the world’s fastest-growing religious group

So God appears to have had great success in convincing the majority of the earth's inhabitants that He is real is the Abrahamic God really does exist.

Nimos said:
Here you have, what must be considered the most knowledgeable being ever, capable of everything, but yet he is unable to make himself more accessible to mere humans than these "manifestations"? Clearly the Jews must have been able to grasp what God was as him and the angels were all around and interacted with them. But suddenly that whole understanding just went away, because humans just couldn't understand it anymore? So again, hope you see why its so difficult to understand the Bahai God view. It just seems extremely vague. Because from that website it say that there is no difference between God of the different religions they are all the same and true. Yet he is unknowable, despite the Jews having written about him, so obvious the majority of what the Jews wrote must be wrong according to Bahai? Because the Jews didn't have huge problems understanding what God was, they had problems doing what he told them to and kept pissing him off. So the ancient Jews understood God, but the modern day Jews don't, because now he is unknowable and can only be known through Baha'u'llah and the other manifestations? Even though Moses were a manifestation and the Jews still knew God, he was just the one that interacted on the behalf of the Jews. In the last story about David where God sends an angel that kills 70000 Jews, that whole story must clearly be a lie according to the Bahai faith and pretty much all other stories in the Bible, because there are hardly any of them where God is not interacting or making his present known to the Jews, either by giving them commands or killing them, obviously if we assume that the stories are true, these people that witness it, would have known that it was God, right?

There are several aspects of the Manifestations of God I really like.

1/ The are real historic figures, although I appreciate that becomes more debatable the further back in history we go.

2/ There are books that record their teachings, even after many centuries or millenia even.

3/ Their Teachings have been tested through individuals and communities in most parts of the world.

So for me, the idea that God communicates through His Manifestations is neither particularly strange or vague.

Of course knowing God is one thing and following His Teachings something different again as the Jews know very well over the last 3,500 years.

We do need to remember the scriptures of the Jewish people are particularly lacking in historicity, particularly anything going back before the Babylonian exile, when it appears that much of the Torah and other Hebrew books were written down.

Did God really kill 7,000 men as recorded in 2 Samuel 24:15 through an Angel of death? There is no evidence to support it actually happened. Its probably better to see the writings as a theological rather than historic narrative.

Nimos said:
I hope you see why its so confusing, because to me it seems a lot like the main idea of Baha'u'llah is unity between people, religions and helping the poor etc. All of which are very noble and good things, so no issues there. But the moment you just scratch the surface in regards to God and the actual believe it just seem to crumble completely as nothing really seems to fit with anything we know. So don't misunderstand me, as if im trying to say that we have to take the stories of the bible literal, even though some people do, but simply looking at the beliefs and faith in these scriptures and how they fit with the Bahai teachings, just doesn't seem to work.

It would be more correct to say it works for some people and it doesn't work for others. Judiasm does have a reformed sect that's far more adept at moving beyond literalism as with many Christian sects. The problem is that for centuries many have taken the Bible as the literal truth and its a huge jump for some to move beyond that. However, taking a theological rather than a literal historic perspective is clearly where mainstream biblical scholarship has been for a few decades now. You can argue that it weakens the foundation of religion, for sure. You could also say it strengthens those same foundations as its a better fit with reality, especially considering science and archaelogy.

Nimos said:
ets try to just work with one story, maybe that will make it more clear for me, because I would like to understand it better.

So the story of Sodom and Gomorrah that were destroyed. (Genesis 19)

Briefly how it goes, So God notice how wicked the people are in those cities and makes a deal with Abraham that if he can find just 5 people that are decent he will spare them, so he send two angels to Sodom to check things out, they then spend the night with Lot, But all the men in the city want to have sex with them... for whatever reason, think they are just wicked.. anyway Lot then flees with his wife and two daughters and are told to not look back as God destroy the cities or they themselves will die, which Lots wife does, so she is killed.

23 By the time Lot reached Zoar, the sun had risen over the land. 24 Then the Lord rained down burning sulfur on Sodom and Gomorrah—from the Lord out of the heavens. 25 Thus he overthrew those cities and the entire plain, destroying all those living in the cities—and also the vegetation in the land. 26 But Lot’s wife looked back, and she became a pillar of salt.

Now Lot and his daughter flees to a cave in the mountains, where they basically get him so drunk that he passes out and they both "rape" him which gets both of them pregnant. (Again a freaking weird story)

Its a weird story alright. Most of Genesis is allegorical, and the story of Sodom and Gomorrah almost certainly is too.

Nimos said:
However, lets assume that its true, wouldn't you think that the Jews knew about God doing this, know about his angels walking among them. I mean the people in the story doesn't really seem all that impressed about seeing Gods angels as they pretty much goes straight to just wanting to have sex with them.

1 The two angels arrived at Sodom in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gateway of the city. When he saw them, he got up to meet them and bowed down with his face to the ground. 2 “My lords,” he said, “please turn aside to your servant’s house. You can wash your feet and spend the night and then go on your way early in the morning.”

“No,” they answered, “we will spend the night in the square.”

3 But he insisted so strongly that they did go with him and entered his house. He prepared a meal for them, baking bread without yeast, and they ate. 4 Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom—both young and old—surrounded the house. 5 They called to Lot, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them.”

How do you see this story or the meaning of it? Do you believe angels exist? and do you think that the Jews just lied about all of this? Because I guess that you can find some that believe the story to be true. So how do Bahais relate to it, how would you explain to me, if I told you that I believed the story were true, that its not? Did Baha'u'llah say that this didn't happen or how do you as a Bahai reach the conclusion that it didn't?

The story reminds us of the dangers of giving too much weight to our sexual urges and to be mindful that our main purpose in life is about spiritual and moral development.

Angels are seen as heavenly mediators between God and man, much like the Manifestations of God in the phenomenal world. Whether they are real or whatever form they have, we can't possibly know for certain.

Nimos said:
Who or what were the neanderthals according to the Bahais and how do they fit into all of this? How do you explain their DNA found in us today?

The Baha'i writings don't have anything specific to say about neanderthals. The Baha'i writings do talk about the harmony betwween science and religion and even accepting science over religion when science as categorically proved something true. For that reason you won't find too many young earth Baha'is.

God has endowed man with intelligence and reason whereby he is required to determine the verity of questions and propositions. If religious beliefs and opinions are found contrary to the standards of science they are mere superstitions and imaginations; for the antithesis of knowledge is ignorance, and the child of ignorance is superstition. Unquestionably there must be agreement between true religion and science. If a question be found contrary to reason, faith and belief in it are impossible… – Abdu’l-Baha, Baha’i World Faith, p. 239.

Unity of Science & Religion

Science and Religion | What Bahá’ís Believe

So if we would look to science, science suggests neanderthals were an early form of humans.

Trailblazer · Sep 15, 2019

Nimos said:
You have already stated before that Baha'u'llah already fulfilled all the prophecies in the bible and that it is of him that it speaks. Even as an atheist, having nothing to loose would I accept what you are saying, I disagree with you. The bible does not speak of him and that Baha'u'llah understanding of these things does not add up with what the bible say and historical what the Jews believed.

So essentially what you are saying is that what the Jews believed, how they understood their scriptures, has to be the truth? That is highly illogical because it is entirely possible that the Jews missed recognizing Baha'u'llah for the same reason that they did not recognize Jesus as the Messiah, because they misinterpreted the prophecies that are about the Messiah.

“The Book of Isaiah announces that the Messiah will conquer the East and the West, and all nations of the world will come under His shadow, that His Kingdom will be established, that He will come from an unknown place, that the sinners will be judged, and that justice will prevail to such a degree that the wolf and the lamb, the leopard and the kid, the sucking child and the asp, shall all gather at one spring, and in one meadow, and one dwelling. 4 The first coming was also under these conditions, though outwardly none of them came to pass. Therefore, the Jews rejected Christ, and, God forbid! called the Messiah masíkh, 5 considered Him to be the destroyer of the edifice of God, regarded Him as the breaker of the Sabbath and the Law, and sentenced Him to death. Nevertheless, each one of these conditions had a signification that the Jews did not understand; therefore, they were debarred from perceiving the truth of Christ.

The second coming of Christ also will be in like manner: the signs and conditions which have been spoken of all have meanings, and are not to be taken literally.” Some Answered Questions, p. 111

As far as I am concerned, the Jews are completely lost since they failed to recognize Jesus, a key Manifestation of God who affected the entire history of mankind! The Jews are forever stuck in the past, waiting for a Messiah they have made in their own image all because of how they have MIS-interpreted the OT prophecies, a Messiah that has already come. Baha’u’llah had a few choice words to say about the Jews.

“And when the days of Moses were ended, and the light of Jesus, shining forth from the Day Spring of the Spirit, encompassed the world, all the people of Israel arose in protest against Him. They clamored that He Whose advent the Bible had foretold must needs promulgate and fulfil the laws of Moses, whereas this youthful Nazarene, who laid claim to the station of the divine Messiah, had annulled the laws of divorce and of the sabbath day—the most weighty of all the laws of Moses. Moreover, what of the signs of the Manifestation yet to come? These people of Israel are even unto the present day still expecting that Manifestation which the Bible hath foretold! How many Manifestations of Holiness, how many Revealers of the light everlasting, have appeared since the time of Moses, and yet Israel, wrapt in the densest veils of satanic fancy and false imaginings, is still expectant that the idol of her own handiwork will appear with such signs as she herself hath conceived! Thus hath God laid hold of them for their sins, hath extinguished in them the spirit of faith, and tormented them with the flames of the nethermost fire. And this for no other reason except that Israel refused to apprehend the meaning of such words as have been revealed in the Bible concerning the signs of the coming Revelation. As she never grasped their true significance, and, to outward seeming, such events never came to pass, she, therefore, remained deprived of recognizing the beauty of Jesus and of beholding the Face of God. And they still await His coming! From time immemorial even unto this day, all the kindreds and peoples of the earth have clung to such fanciful and unseemly thoughts, and thus have deprived themselves of the clear waters streaming from the springs of purity and holiness...” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 20-21

Nimos said:
Is the bible and the Quran expressly revealed in the Writings of Baha'u'llah? Does he go through all the scriptures and if not would that mean that the UHJ have authority to make decisions about them? Or what would prevent them from doing so, according to what you wrote here?

Baha’u’llah does address the Bible and even more so the Qur’an in The Kitab-iIqan.

As I said, the UHJ has no authority to interpret any scriptures of past religions or make any decisions about them. All the UHJ did was have an opinion as to how Baha’is should view those scriptures, but it is up to us how we interpret them.

Nimos said:
Eventually as we start to reject more and more stories of the bible, there are so little left, that to even assume that we know anything about the God which the ancient Jews believed in, would be ridiculous as it would be based on guessing, with nothing to back up what people actually believed. Meaning that anyone could just make up whatever nature of God they wanted and it would be an as equally valid opinion as anyone else.

I agree, if you are talking about the nature of God. That is revealed in the OT and the ancient Jews got it right. The stories are all part of that. Where the Jews went astray Imo is when they rejected Jesus thus rejecting the God of the NT. Don’t you view that as problematic?

Nimos said:
The reason I would answer like that, is because until you can proof to me that God exist, then I see no reason to follow anything that is written in the scriptures. The reason I can answer like that, is because I don't do it based on faith in the scriptures, believing that they are inspired by God.

The conundrum is that the scriptures are the only real proof that God exists, that and the Messengers God sends.

Nimos said:
So if people go around and just throw out whatever stories they don't agree with, are they all that different from atheists?

The difference is that if believers do not believe that a particular story literally happened we believe it was allegorical and contains spiritual meanings whereas atheists have no reason to believe it has any meaning.

Nimos said:
The same goes when people start to believe or interpret scriptures out of context, the meaning and understanding of God, simply falls apart. So when Baha'u'llah, as you say, starts to explain what all this about clouds, sun etc. actually means, but it having no valid reason for being true in relationship to what the stories say, what we know about the ancient Jews and what they believed in, as we get most of this information from these scriptures.

What you keep doing is assuming the ancient Jews knew the *real meaning* of all the scriptures and nobody else knows and that what the ancient Jews believed was necessarily the only truth from God there ever was. Why this obsession with the ancient Jews? Do you think they have a monopoly on God? The Jews turned away from Jesus so that shows they do not understand the prophecies of their own prophets. The reason to believe that the ancient Jews had it right is no more valid than the reason to believe that Baha’u’llah had it right.

Nimos said:
Then God as we know him starts to crumble and have very little with that found in the Bible or Hebrew bible. And without that, then there is no Bahai or Islamic God. But rather you have someone's opinion about what a potential God might be like, and you can agree with that or not and basically the only information you have about him is from that person's mouth.

So you think that the OT is the entire basis for God’s existence, IF God exists? Don’t tell that to any Hindus. So you think that the Hebrew Bible is the best source of information about God and it sets the divine standard? Baha’u’llah’s Writings are not someone’s opinion; they are the Writings of a Manifestation of God.

Nimos said:
if we look at the Gospels and how Jesus speaks about those in charge, its clear that things are not really going according to what Jesus think they should. Which could indicate that people at the time, especially those in power, might have "corrupted" the teachings as well.

I do not think there is really any way to know what happened because the NT has so many authors but the Baha’i position is this:

The Bahá'ís believe that God's Revelation is under His care and protection and that the essence, or essential elements, of what His Manifestations intended to convey has been recorded and preserved in Their Holy Books. However, as the sayings of the ancient Prophets were written down some time later, we cannot categorically state, as we do in the case of the Writings of Bahá'u'lláh, that the words and phrases attributed to Them are Their exact words.
(9 August 1984 to an individual believer)
The Bible: Extracts on the Old and New Testaments

No, I can't and my guess is that there are different views of this among muslims. but some quick research, seems to suggest that some say that this only apply to law bearing prophets. But again, as I mentioned earlier, Im not all that well into Islam. But then again, Im not the one you have to convince, but rather the muslims that disagree with you and that could probably be an interesting discussion. But its outside, my knowledge of Islam, that I would be able to give any valid answers to it.

Nimos said:
I found this article which gives their view on it. But again you can read it, but I have no clue if this is what the majority of muslims agree with, but in it the person say the following and there are some quotes as well:

Thanks for the quotes. I do not think there is anything definitive regarding this issue of the last prophet, but rather, just like all religions, Muslims believe their Prophet is special and another one “like Him” will come again. Baha’is also believe Baha’u’llah is special. We also believe there will be more prophets in the future, but they will all be under the shadow of Baha’u’llah during this Cycle of religion. The present Universal Cycle of religion includes the Adamic Cycle (Prophetic Cycle) which lasted 6,000 years and the Baha’i Cycle (Cycle of Fulfillment) which will last no less than 500,000 years.

Will Mankind Survive?

Well-Known Member

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Veteran Member

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Jesus in me

Jesus in me

Jesus in me

Well-Known Member

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i

Well-Known Member

Veteran Member

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i

Veteran Member